Valve's Portal 2 Confirmed for Mac

[jebbe]

It's weird to think Valve has gone from the most hated gaming company for Mac users to the most loved in the span of just a few weeks.

Not that I'm complaining. This is awesome.

Most hated? Since when?

If anyone is the most hated I think that award would have to go to EA for putting such garbage that they time and time again.

 

[GoodWatch]

Good show! I have the Imac to make this work so bring it on!

 

[Manic Mouse]

I believe that Modern Warfare 2 is a bad example given the negative reputation it has garnered in PC circles if not outright boycott.

What do you define as a hardcore gamer? Would you believe that I am one?

Perhaps, but it's the biggest gaming release of all time so it should be popular on all platforms. PC gaming is definitely second fiddle to consoles these days whatever way you cut it. And if developers are aiming at console releases those games should be eminently playable on any modern computer with a 9400m upwards.

All the source games should run dandy on my 9400m (so long as they're native and not Cider ports).

I don't know enough about you to define you. I would consider myself a hardcore gamer, but have always been a console guy. PC gaming is way too expensive for the return you get in comparison IMO.

I think it's great news that Steam and source games are coming to the Mac. Hopefully it'll mean more games being ported in future.

EDIT: I will add, I think PC sales are poor due to a variety of reasons. Two of these, a lack of coherent infrastructure and piracy, are tackled by Steam which is why I think it's the future of PC gaming.

 

[Detrius]

I didn't vote negative myself, but here's what I'm imagining is going through their head:

OH NOES!!! Now I no longer have to close everything and reboot into Windows to play my games!!! Therefore, I WILL actually play my games, and my wife will HATE me for it!!! GAHHHH!!!!!!

On top of this, I bet Valve added to the hardware check in Steam to verify whether the bootcamp tools were installed or some other way to see that someone was actually running a Mac (e.g. under Wine). This would show them pretty definitively that there's a demand, as they'd see it straight from their hardware specs.

 

[La Porta]

Now if we can get some new Mac Pros and some more video card options with ADCs....

 

[/dev/toaster]

http://source.valvesoftware.com/SourceBrochure.pdf

I don't see how Portal 2 being available for Mac directly means that the Source Engine itself can natively support OS X. A direct example is the presence of Orange Box on PS3. Those Source Engine games were ported to the PS3 by EA and not Valve. The marketing material to license the Source Engine states that the Source Engine can only output code to target the PC and XBox 360 platforms, not the PS3. So individual Source Engine games being ported to OS X does not directly mean that the Source Engine itself can support OS X.

Of course, ideally I hope that the Source Engine can natively support OS X just like it does PC and XBox 360, but we'll have to see if they update their marketing materials to reflect that.

On the graphics card issue, it's a non-issue in Source Engine games. The Source Engine is very flexible and even has fallbacks to DirectX 6. Currently, the most advanced code path in the Source Engine is DirectX 9 with no DirectX 10 codepath. Valve games should play just fine on any Intel Mac with a discrete GPU. Of course, older models will need lower settings.

Where the lack of top-end GPU power is questionable is whether it'll discourage the porting of other AAA games to Mac even if Steam for Mac should be a boost for Mac gaming. Still, while Mac's don't usually have the fastest graphics cards in their generation, they are still decent and would fit the minimum or recommended requirements of most games.

And as others have said, the problem is as much driver support as hardware support. Windows drivers are more optimized than OS X drivers so performance is being left on the table. Quicker responses with driver fixes and optimization for new games like on Windows is also required to encourage developer support.

So, are you suggesting that EA ported orange box over to the PS3 without using the source engine at all ? If they used a different engine the game would look very, very different. Not to mention, the wikipedia page for Orange box on the PS3 lists the source engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Box

The source page on wikipedia also lists platforms as, Windows, Xbox, XBox 360 and PS3. Now because of licensing, it could mean that ONLY EA can do the porting of anything using the source engine to the PS3. That sounds a lot more like it.

My guess is that Valve teamed up with EA because EA has the engineering resources and knowledge to port a game from Microsoft platforms to the PS3.

It would make sense for Valve to port steam AND the source engine over to the Mac. Why would they only make portal 2 available on Mac without tapping into those other games and make even more money. It just makes no sense.

Once the framework is ported over, everything else falls into place.

 

[*LTD*]

I loathe caffeine and energy drinks. On a side note, I loved Myst too.

Caffeine from certain tea sources (especially green tea) is fine because the Theanine in the tea (which is very, very beneficial) moderates caffeine. A combination of relaxation and focus. Theanine also enhances cognitive function and protects the brain from stroke.

I recommend at least 3 cups of green tea a day to everyone. It's quite a coffee-replacement. It also prevents and even destroys certain forms of cancer.

I loved Myst as well. I don't recall any game's ending having quite an effect on me as Myst's. Wow, this is gong back to early 1995 for me. I love me some EVE Online and classic Fallout (not the new abomination), but Myst is right up there with the classic Marathon series, if not even better. Different genres, though.

This whole conversation has me itching to play EV: Nova again (and the OS X version of Myst) . . .

 

[HLdan]

I personally refuse to play games under Windows.

Here here!!

 

[Justinf79]

Awesome news!

The less time I hate to spend in windoze the better.

 

[jmull]

Any chance my 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo with Intel GMA can run this? No? Oh, well...

Intel GMA, what was Apple thinking? I recently bought a 21" 3.33C2D w/ 4670, and it runs any game I throw at it. I've even ran games and forgot I had farmville running, and I never noticed.

 

[dzamir]

But does it matter at this point ? Doesn't any mac user who's serious about gaming just install a Windows partition via Bootcamp ?

I don't want to restart to play a small session of Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead

 

[Frobozz]

Steam & Portal 2 are good for the Mac

Having played Portal and being a great admirer of Steam on my gaming PC, I greatly anticipate both releases on the Mac.

This is incredibly positive news for the Mac gaming community. If most of Valve's catalogue comes to the Mac, you can legitimately say that a large portion of AAA PC-only titles are now Mac bound.

Kudos to Valve for seeing the light on this-- the recent Mac market share numbers probably help!

 

[dzamir]

Don't see the point of gaming on OS X. The games are invariably lucky to achieve 3/4 the framerate of the same game under Windows.

Native port of "Tales of Monkey Island" runs better on the Mac side than the Windows side.

 

[*LTD*]

Don't see the point of gaming on OS X. The games are invariably lucky to achieve 3/4 the framerate of the same game under Windows.

If it's a native Mac version, it's all good. The problem is with ports.

 

[Erwin-Br]

Native port of "Tales of Monkey Island" runs better on the Mac side than the Windows side.

Don't make up facts, please. I'm a regular on their forums and the contrary is true, I'm sorry to say. Especially Intel cards (ugh) run the Monkey Island games better on Windows. One of the developers even explained why:

From what I understand, the problem is in the driver implementation on MacOS X with the GMA (Integrated Graphics) cards. A problem that can not be fixed by the game's software and thus likely won't be fixed by Apple who make the graphics drivers.

Windows GMA drivers (and all Intel Integrated Graphics) allow for the acquisition of system RAM to use as VRAM (Video RAM). The card itself contains 64mb of dedicated VRAM, but the Windows drivers eat up system RAM to expand memory. You're not going to get the best performance ever by adding more RAM, but it helps out.

The MacOS X GMA drivers do not expand the VRAM with system RAM. This makes the card fixed at 64mb with no adjustments. Thus on MacOS X, you get worse performance as the graphic drivers behave significantly different than the Windows graphic drivers. The card in MacOS will top out quicker than the same card on Windows, purely on drivers.

 

[Wiggleforce]

I don't want to restart to play a small session of Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead

Indeed! Hate to Bootcamp to play a little.

 

[Takuta-Nui]

Fan-tas-tic.

 

[commander.data]

So, are you suggesting that EA ported orange box over to the PS3 without using the source engine at all ? If they used a different engine the game would look very, very different. Not to mention, the wikipedia page for Orange box on the PS3 lists the source engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Box

The source page on wikipedia also lists platforms as, Windows, Xbox, XBox 360 and PS3. Now because of licensing, it could mean that ONLY EA can do the porting of anything using the source engine to the PS3. That sounds a lot more like it.

My guess is that Valve teamed up with EA because EA has the engineering resources and knowledge to port a game from Microsoft platforms to the PS3.

It would make sense for Valve to port steam AND the source engine over to the Mac. Why would they only make portal 2 available on Mac without tapping into those other games and make even more money. It just makes no sense.

Once the framework is ported over, everything else falls into place.

I'm no expert in game porting, but as I understand it there is a difference between a game being ported over to a platform and a game engine being able to directly output code natively to that platform. As in currently, in a simplified sense, you can write a game using the Source Engine and related development tools and select to compile to either the PC or the XBox 360 as compile targets. I don't believe you can do that for the PS3. Sort of like how Steve Jobs was promoting the PPC to Intel transition as a bit of code modifying and simply clicking a x86 checkbox in XCode and you'd get a workable program. The Source Engine can do that between PC and XBox 360 but not PS3.

People were suggesting just because Portal 2 is available for Mac, it'd be logical/trivial to bring other Source Engine games to Mac. Yes, it would be a lot easier because most of the work can be reused. But the ultimate in cross-platform support to set the stage for future games is if the Source Engine can natively develop for OS X, so that in a simplified sense, the same game code in the development tools can be compiled to either PC, XBox 360, and OS X with a few settings. Platform specific optimizations would of course come later.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

new Apple "Get A Mac" ad: "Mac Gaming"

They better have the hardware to back that up or they will get mocked big time.

 

[dscuber9000]

Wow, now I don't know if I'll buy it for Xbox 360 or Mac. And now I can reconsider putting Windows 7 on my Mac because I would only use it for gaming, and the only games I would ever play are Valve games.

I'd also like to add that this says A LOT about the degree to which Valve HATES the PlayStation 3. I mean, they support Mac before PS3? Man.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

Perhaps, but it's the biggest gaming release of all time so it should be popular on all platforms. PC gaming is definitely second fiddle to consoles these days whatever way you cut it. And if developers are aiming at console releases those games should be eminently playable on any modern computer with a 9400m upwards.

All the source games should run dandy on my 9400m (so long as they're native and not Cider ports).

I don't know enough about you to define you. I would consider myself a hardcore gamer, but have always been a console guy. PC gaming is way too expensive for the return you get in comparison IMO.

I think it's great news that Steam and source games are coming to the Mac. Hopefully it'll mean more games being ported in future.

EDIT: I will add, I think PC sales are poor due to a variety of reasons. Two of these, a lack of coherent infrastructure and piracy, are tackled by Steam which is why I think it's the future of PC gaming.

Those figures pose the question of why the hell they would bother with Macs then? If PC gamers are only 3% of their sales, why the hell would publishers bother with Macs? There are a hell of a lot more PCs out there than Macs, and all those PCs put together account for a tiny proportion of sales.

PC gaming gives me much more return than my console. Aside from the satisfaction that I have built the machine, I also have incredible framerates, higher resolutions, better controls, better online experience, the ability to alt tab out to surf the net. The price of a gaming PC is offset by these things and the fact that you can use it as a PC too. You seem to have made some strange financial decisions there if you bought a Mac and a games console.

Mac hardware is merely adequate for gaming. Of course the same is true for many PCs, but on the PC there is an option for expansion if you find the experience less than you expected. A Mac will not offer these options except at incredible expense.

A note on rebooting to Windows for gaming. What sort of weeds are you that you find rebooting a machine to be a hassle? Aside from the fact that you should really shutdown all your open programs anyway to make the game run better, rebooting costs you so little actual effort I am appalled that you would complain. How long does the reboot take? A minute? A minute 30? It would take you that long to boot an XBox360 and load a game into it. On a Macbook Pro with discrete graphics you have to reboot anyway to change graphics card.

 

[cumanzor]

Wait......... no PS3?

 

[MMX]

A note on rebooting to Windows for gaming. What sort of weeds are you that you find rebooting a machine to be a hassle? Aside from the fact that you should really shutdown all your open programs anyway to make the game run better, rebooting costs you so little actual effort I am appalled that you would complain. How long does the reboot take? A minute? A minute 30? It would take you that long to boot an XBox360 and load a game into it. On a Macbook Pro with discrete graphics you have to reboot anyway to change graphics card.

Why? Because I want to keep my machine clean. If I can run games natively I will.

 

[mixel]

PC gaming gives me much more return than my console. Aside from the satisfaction that I have built the machine, I also have incredible framerates, higher resolutions, better controls, better online experience, the ability to alt tab out to surf the net. The price of a gaming PC is offset by these things and the fact that you can use it as a PC too. You seem to have made some strange financial decisions there if you bought a Mac and a games console.

Mac hardware is merely adequate for gaming. Of course the same is true for many PCs, but on the PC there is an option for expansion if you find the experience less than you expected. A Mac will not offer these options except at incredible expense.

I agree partly, but the communities around the consoles are great too. I dont agree that Mac hardware is just "adequate" though. My dual core iMac with an 8800GS runs Resi Evil 5, L4D2 incredibly nicely and much MUCH crisper, with a lot more detail and higher framerate/res than the console versions..

So if my outdated iMac does that, and my MBP is almost as good, I see the Mac as a very good gaming platform if people have current or recent Macs.

A note on rebooting to Windows for gaming. What sort of weeds are you that you find rebooting a machine to be a hassle? Aside from the fact that you should really shutdown all your open programs anyway to make the game run better, rebooting costs you so little actual effort I am appalled that you would complain. How long does the reboot take? A minute? A minute 30? It would take you that long to boot an XBox360 and load a game into it. On a Macbook Pro with discrete graphics you have to reboot anyway to change graphics card.

Nah, in Windows (on my iMac) I use mediamonkey to play music while i play some games. I'd do the same with itunes on my osX partition. I'd like to keep my IM apps and email proggy open while I game too a lot of the time. Would be nice to have a bittorrent client open as well, etc. I always leave my MBP set to the 9600m, hehe. I close a lot of stuff to game, but I'd keep more apps open if the games were running on the same OS as the bulk of my software! It is a bit of an inconvenience really if you use your Mac for a lot of things at once to know you have to stop *everything* to play a game. Can be a bit of a commitment and doesn't help productivity at all. hell, octo MacPros etc could be doing a tonne of stuff while running a game if they didn’t have to reboot.

Also at least on the mac side i wont have to run avast/avg etc, hehe.

 

[helenkan]

I agree partly, but the communities around the consoles are great too. I dont agree that Mac hardware is just "adequate" though. My dual core iMac with an 8800GS runs Resi Evil 5, L4D2 incredibly nicely and much MUCH crisper, with a lot more detail and higher framerate/res than the console versions..

So if my outdated iMac does that, and my MBP is almost as good, I see the Mac as a very good gaming platform if people have current or recent Macs.


Nah, in Windows (on my iMac) I use mediamonkey to play music while i play some games. I'd do the same with itunes on my osX partition. I'd like to keep my IM apps and email proggy open while I game too a lot of the time. Would be nice to have a bittorrent client open as well, etc. I always leave my MBP set to the 9600m, hehe. I close a lot of stuff to game, but I'd keep more apps open if the games were running on the same OS as the bulk of my software! It is a bit of an inconvenience really if you use your Mac for a lot of things at once to know you have to stop *everything* to play a game. Can be a bit of a commitment and doesn't help productivity at all. hell, octo MacPros etc could be doing a tonne of stuff while running a game if they didn’t have to reboot.

Also at least on the mac side i wont have to run avast/avg etc, hehe.

I think Windows still has a slight edge in gaming performance, but some Macs are also quite beasty for game setups. You just got to know what system to chose/build. My prior obsession, oblivion ran great on a Mac.